Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED:

That Councillor Williams be appointed Vice-Chairperson for 2025/26.

To record the names of apologies given and Deputy Members who are attending the meeting in place of appointed Members.

Apologies were noted as above.

To receive any disclosure of interests from Councillors or Officers in matters to be discussed.

Note: Councillors are reminded of their obligations to declare disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs), other registerable interests (ORIs), non-registerable interests (NRIs) and on Pre-determination or Bias in accordance with legislation and the Council’s Code of Conduct.

If you require advice, please contact the appropriate Democratic Services Officer, prior to the meeting.

Councillor Rutter made a personal statement that she was the Ward Member in respect of item 14, 4 Boyne Mead Road, Kings Worthy (25/00542/HOU). However, she had taken no part in discussions regarding the application, therefore she took part in the consideration of the item and voted thereon.

Councillor Gordon Smith made a personal statement that he was the Ward Member in respect of item 8, Clematis Cottage, 54 Grange Road, Alresford, Hampshire, SO24 9HF (24/00569/FUL). However, he had taken no part in discussions regarding the application, therefore he took part in the consideration of the item and voted thereon.

Councillor Williams declared a disclosable pecuniary interest due to his role as Hampshire County Councillor. However, as there was no material conflict of interest, he remained in the room, spoke and voted under the dispensation granted on behalf of the Audit and Governance Committee to participate and vote in all matters which might have a County Council involvement. In addition, Councillor Williams advised that the following agenda items were within his  Hampshire County Council division, however, he had taken no part in discussions regarding the applications, therefore he took part in the consideration of the item and voted thereon.

1. Item 10: The Rising Sun, 27 Spring Lane, Colden Common, SO21 1SB (case reference: 25/00052/FUL).
2. Item 11: 33C New Road, Colden Common, SO21 1RU (case reference: 25/00632/HOU).
3. Item 13: 15 Princes Close, Bishops Waltham, SO32 1RL (case reference: 24/02633/OUT).

Councillor Langford Smith advised that she had an interest in item number Item 7: Hamelin, Hambledon Road, Denmead, PO7 6NG (case reference: 25/00197/FUL). She advised that the application was within her ward, that she was also a Parish Councillor for Denmead and had voted on that item whilst a member of the planning committee at Denmead Parish Council. She would leave the room for that item and take no part in the determination of the application.

Minutes of the previous meeting held on 16 April 2025.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 16 April 2025 be approved and adopted.

The committee agreed to receive the Update Sheet as an addendum to the report.

A copy of each planning application decision is available to view on the council’s website under the respective planning application.

The committee considered the following items:

Proposal Description: Variation of Condition 3 of Planning Consent 19/01573/FUL to allow the premises to be used for supported living for adults with learning difficulties (within Use Class C2.

The application was introduced and during public participation, Neil March and Hayden Foster spoke in support of the application and answered members' questions. The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application.

RESOLVED

The committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report.

Proposal Description: The construction of a pair of semi-detached two-storey dwellings to the rear of the plot, fronting Thornton Close.

The application was introduced. Members were referred to the update sheet which provided additional information regarding several matters including the following.

1. Amendment to Condition 16: This condition now includes the removal of all permitted development rights from Part 1 and Class A of the GPDO (General Permitted Development Order), specifically relating to hard surfacing. Full details were set out in the update sheet.
2. New Condition 17: This new condition requires a construction management plan to be submitted, which must cover aspects such as parking, vehicle turning, construction vehicle movements, and deliveries. Full details were set out in the update sheet.

In addition, the case officer provided a verbal update and provided further information concerning that a new condition will be added concerning access to the site from Thornton Close. This condition would require evidence to be submitted prior to the commencement of works, confirming that the land for access has either been purchased or that rights for access, utility services, and drainage have been granted by the current landowner.

The purpose of this is to ensure that the development is accessible to vehicles and that there is sufficient room for safe manoeuvring.

During public participation, Jonathan Hickey and James Chaplin spoke in objection to the application, and Madhu Murtala spoke in support of the application and answered members' questions.

Councillor Margot Power spoke as a ward member and expressed several points on behalf of residents which could be summarised as follows.

1. Councillor Power did not believe that there would be a positive impact on the character of the area. She stated that Thornton Close residents would lose "free-range" car parking spaces and an area of hedging. She also disputed that the development would not harm residential amenities, highlighting that it would result in increased traffic and reduced parking provision.
2. It was pointed out that the report indicated 15 properties nearby at that end of Thornton Close. This was quite a densely packed area where some properties had no outside space. Councillor Power questioned why residents of Thornton Close had not been notified of the planning application, as they were the ones who would be most affected, whilst the impact on Grange Road residents was comparatively minor.
3. Councillor Power referenced the original planning application for the wider development, which was for 34 houses and 75 car parking spaces. She highlighted a discrepancy in the current car parking space count for the area, noting the officer's figure of 56 spaces, whereas her own count was 42 spaces plus eight garages. She added that submitted photographs, including those of the night-time parking situation, illustrated the limited parking available.
4. In conclusion, Councillor Power stated that the two proposed houses would damage the visual appearance of Thornton Close, as residents would overlook parked cars and bins instead of greenery. She felt the development would negatively impact close neighbours, would remove two regularly used “free-range” car  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Proposal Description: Erection of a two-storey side extension, a single-storey rear extension, and alterations to external landscaping, including changes to the parking arrangement at the front of the property.

The application was introduced and during public participation, James Bowman and Tony Blunn spoke in support of the application and answered members' questions.

The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application.

RESOLVED

The committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report.

Proposal Description: Ground floor single-storey extension.

The application was introduced. During public participation, Francesca Santovito spoke in objection to the application, and Jonathan Spencer spoke in support of the application and answered members' questions.

Councillor Sue Cook spoke as a ward member and expressed several points on behalf of residents which could be summarised as follows.

1. She acknowledged the officer's recommendation for approval of the application but felt that this should not detract from other outstanding issues at the public house site. She welcomed that an application was submitted before work commenced, contrasting this with previous instances involving retrospective applications.
2. She advised that a condition from a previous application stipulated a minimum of 40 car parking spaces for the public house, whereas the current provision was 16 spaces.
3. She referred to Hampshire Highways' consultation response, which indicated that parking was a matter for Winchester City Council as the planning authority, and noted that Hampshire Highways did not object to ongoing issues of overspill parking on local roads, including on double yellow lines, which impacted residents of Spring Lane.
4. She understood that the current parking standards included a requirement for 17 spaces for the public house, whereas only 16 were provided, resulting in a shortfall and exacerbating parking problems.
5. She suggested that conditions should be considered, relating to:
   1. Ensuring doors and windows were kept closed during entertainment.
   2. The management of the smoking area, noting its proposed relocation from the front to the rear.
6. She advised of concerns that relocating the smoking area to the rear would impact nearby residents due to increased customer presence, potential for loud music, and general behaviour in proximity to their gardens.
7. She urged the planning committee to consider these points along with those of a previously public speaker, and reiterated that, despite understanding the officer's recommendation for approval, a condition regarding a Construction Management Plan should be utilised given the history of issues at the site.
8. Finally, Councillor Cook urged the applicant, to engage in communication and dialogue with residents to resolve ongoing issues.

The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application.

RESOLVED

The committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report. Subject to an additional condition regarding the inclusion of a construction management plan and that the precise wording be delegated to the Chair of the Planning Committee, in consultation with the Service Lead: Built Environment.

Proposal Description: Single-storey front/side extension.

The application was introduced, and members were advised that the application was being reported to the Committee as the applicant is a member of staff.

RESOLVED

The committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report.

The following items will not be considered before 2.00pm:

(Depending on the Committee’s progress, some of the morning’s items may overrun into the afternoon session.  Nevertheless, the following items will not be considered before 2.00pm).

A copy of each planning application decision is available to view on the council’s website under the respective planning application.

The committee considered the following items:

Proposal Description: Outline application for new 3 bedroom detached dwelling within the garden of 15 Princes Close.

The application was introduced. Members were referred to the update sheet which provided additional information regarding several matters. In addition, the case officer provided a verbal update and provided further information concerning the following:

1. An update on Condition 1: The application for approval of reserved matters (access, appearance, landscape, and scale) is solely to determine the layout of the scheme.
2. A variation of Condition 3, which again refers to reserved matters related to access, appearance, layout, and scale.
3. An amendment to Condition 10 regarding permitted development removal, to encompass further elements of the legislation concerning porches and outbuildings. Full details were set out in the update sheet.
4. A new condition has been added concerning a construction management plan. That no development shall take place until a Construction Management Plan (CMP) has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, to include details of: i. parking and turning of operative, construction, and visitor vehicles ii. deliveries, loading and unloading of plant and materials iii. storage of plant and materials. The approved details shall be implemented and adhered to during the construction period.

During public participation, Craig Tickner spoke in support of the application and answered members' questions. The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application.

RESOLVED

The committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report, the update sheet and provided in the case officers' verbal update.

Proposal Description: Loft conversion with extended roof infill and front and rear dormer windows.

The application was introduced. Members were referred to the update sheet which provided additional information regarding several matters including the following.

1. The report refers to the three windows on the rear dormer as top-hung. They should be referred to as bottom hung.
2. A change to Condition 2 to reflect updated plans showing these windows being bottom hung and obscured glazed.
3. Condition 4 has also been edited to confirm that these windows will be bottom hung as well as obscured glazed.

Full details were set out in the update sheet.

During public participation, Pete Curtis spoke in objection to the application and answered members' questions.

The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application and received advice from the Legal Officer regarding the proposed materials for the extension.

RESOLVED

The committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report and the update sheet.